This study investigates farmer's needs, ideas and interests on the adoption of Fossil Energy Free Technologies and Strategies (FEFTS). 470 direct farmer surveys and 41 expert interviews were conducted in 8 EU countries to identify the barriers and drivers to the adoption of FEFTS, results were analysed using SPSS. The findings suggest that the adoption of FEFTS is driven primarily by economic factors, with cost reduction emerging as a dominant motivation for adopting renewable energy sources (RES) and energy-saving technologies/practices. Environmental concerns also play a significant role. Farmers indicate that financial support and access to tailored cost benefit models for their farms are important drivers to becoming FEFTS adopters. Based on these results we argue that enhanced financial support as planned in the Common Agricultural Policy 2023-2027 together with national advisory services that support innovation and knowledge transfer are necessary to drive the adoption of FEFTS in the agriculture sector.

This paper provides policy recommendations for accelerating the adoption of Fossil-Energy-Free Technologies and Strategies (FEFTS) in the EU agricultural sector. Faster adoption of these technologies and strategies is crucial to achieving the medium- and long-term sustainability targets laid out in EU policy. The prepared policy recommendations originate out of the key outputs and findings of the Horizon 2020 project “AgroFossilFree”, including an assessment and evaluation of the current energy use status in EU agriculture, survey results on farmers’ needs, ideas and interests on the adoption of FEFTS, FEFTS categories identified through an online inventory of FEFTS called the AgEnergy platform, and key innovative processes through national and transnational workshops that combine expertise from hundreds of keys stakeholders (researchers, innovation brokers, policymakers, farmers, and industry representatives). The policy recommendations are synthesized and presented in the form of 19 policy briefs split into three main categories: those that are related to energy issues in farming and can be applied to any farm and FEFTS type; those that are specific to certain agricultural production systems; and those that are necessary for FEFTS integration in agriculture in general.

This study conducts a review of the current practices of bioeconomy education and training in the EU; as well as the associated methodologies; techniques and approaches. In recent years; considerable efforts have been made towards developing appropriate bioeconomy education and training programs in order to support a transition towards a circular bioeconomy. This review separates bioeconomy education approaches along: higher education and academic approaches, vocational education and training (VET) and practical approaches, short-term training and education approaches, and other approaches. A range of training methodologies and techniques and pedagogical approaches are identified. The main commonalities found amongst these approaches are that they are generally problem based and interdisciplinary, and combine academic and experiential. Higher education approaches are generally based on traditional lecture/campus-based formats with some experiential approaches integrated. In contrast, VET approaches often combine academic and practical learning methods while focusing on developing practical skills. A range of short-term courses and other approaches to bioeconomy education are also reviewed.

This study conducts a review of energy use in the EU greenhouse agriculture sector. The studies presented illustrate that energy use in greenhouses is varied and generally dependent on fossil sources. High energy systems, which are more dominant in northern Europe, are generally heavily climate controlled and energy use is dominated by heating and cooling processes, while low energy systems, which are dominant in southern Europe, show a mixture of energy uses including heating, cooling, irrigation, lighting, fertilisers, and pesticides. Our review also provides a discussion of energy efficiency measures and renewable energy sources adoption for greenhouse production. Finally, our review indicates that accurate and reliable studies on energy use in greenhouse production are scarce and fragmented and that a range of differing methodologies are currently used to estimate on-farm energy use. The development of a comprehensive methodology and categorisation for measuring energy use in greenhouse agricultural production would, in our view, catalyse further studies in this sector, considerably improve our understanding of energy use in greenhouses and support the green transition. Based on this, this paper proposes a basic framework for measuring energy use in greenhouse agriculture.

We find that there is sufficient technical feedstock availability for Greece to reach its medium-term targets on the production and use of advanced biofuels, renewable gases, electrofuels and recycled carbon fuels for the Greek transport sector. Our analysis suggests that the biomass fraction of municipal solid waste, the biomass fraction of industrial waste, animal manure and sewage sludge, tree prunings, carbon dioxide feedstocks from industrial sources and refuse derived fuels/plastics are feedstocks with sufficient availability until 2050 for the production of renewable fuels and gases for the transport sector in Greece. As a rough indicator, if all the technically achievable feedstocks covered in this study are converted into associated advanced fuels (excluding recycled carbon fuels), this could equate to 7% in 2020, 8.2% in 2030, 9.3% in 2040 and 10.3% in 2050 of the total energy consumed in the transport sector. With policy support, the production of biomethane from the biomass fraction of municipal solid waste, hydrotreated vegetable oil and recycled carbon fuels have possibilities in Greece by 2030, while electrofuels and biomethane from other sources have possibilities by 2040 and lignocellulosic ethanol does not have possibilities in the long run due to limited feedstocks and high costs.

This study conducts a review bringing together data from a large number of studies investigating energy use in EU livestock systems. Such a study has not been conducted previously, and improvements in our understanding of energy use concentrations in livestock systems will aid in developing interventions to achieve the EU’s 2030 and 2050 sustainability targets. The results from the Life Cycle Assessments included in this review indicate that energy use is concentrated in feed, housing, and manure management. In most systems, animal feed is the dominant energy use category. Regarding specific livestock categories, the studies covered indicate that energy use requirements range from 2.1 to 5.3 MJ/kg per ECM for cow milk, 59.2 MJ/kg for a suckler cow–calf, and 43.73 MJ/kg for a dairy bull, 15.9 MJ/kg to 22.7 MJ/kg for pork production, 9.6 MJ/kg to 19.1 MJ/kg for broiler production, 20.5–23.5 MJ/kg for chicken egg production. Our review indicates dominance of and dependence on fossil fuel and discusses the situation and research around transitioning towards renewable energy sources and improving energy efficiency. Our analysis indicates that existing energy use data in livestock systems are fragmented and characterized by multiple methodologies and considerable data gaps. In our view, there is a need for the development of a standardized methodology for measuring energy use in livestock systems, which we consider a necessary step to develop interventions that reduce fossil energy use in livestock systems and its contribution to climatic change.

Our economic analysis shows that for Greece no advanced biofuels, renewable gases or electrofuels are currently or will be, until 2050, cost competitive with the production or import costs of fossil fuel equivalents at current fossil fuel prices. This situation holds despite strong learning curve effects for the technologies covered in this study. However, our economic analysis has shown that there are various scenarios and policy interventions that could make some of these fuels cost competitive in Greece with current or slightly higher fossil fuel prices. If the price of crude oil rises significantly to 100 euros per barrel, then recycled carbon fuels and Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil (HVO) can be competitive or close to being economically competitive by 2030 depending on the exact fuel-technology combination. Similarly, injecting biomethane into the natural gas grid becomes cost competitive with natural gas at a tipping fee of 29 euros per tonne in 2020, 21 euros per tonne in 2030, 17 euros per tonne in 2040 and 15 euros per tonne in 2050. Some of the incentives for the production of these advanced fuels could be provided in the form of a landfill tax, higher carbon prices, tax breaks, direct subsidies and high taxes for fossil fuels.

Understanding how policies affect price transmission and incentives for producers and consumers along the complete value chain is a relevant research question due to the more globalized structure of agricultural value chains. In particular, Nigerian agricultural value chains have been targeted by a number of policy decisions. We analyze the import‐oriented palm oil value chain and the export‐oriented cacao value chain, estimating the price distortions from policies and their implications for production incentives at the regional level. For palm oil, due to protective trade policies and domestic initiatives, the nominal rate of protection (NRP) at the farmgate for palm oil producers shows that producers have been protected. NRPs at the border for cacao beans and cocoa products are negative, which may be due to a quality gap, the export market structure, and the concentration of buyers in global markets. Negative NRPs at the farmgate are seen for all regions, showing disincentives in the cacao beans export market reverberate through the domestic market despite domestic support policies. In both value chains, NRPs at farmgate vary across regions partially due to regional policy frameworks and partially due to local conditions impacting price transmission.